Talk:Dorcas

etymology

I'm not sure why the gazelle etymology in particular was tagged with a fact tag, but according to the OED, dorcas comes from "modern Latin (adopted from the specific epithet of Gazella dorcas, once used as a generic name in its own right), adaptation of Greek δορκάς deer, gazelle."
I've yet to figure out wikipedia's citation system, so I'm not going to add the citation, but if anyone wants to, there's the info and the link. - Severinus 00:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the reference to the name Tabitha as being from the Textus Receptus is confusing. The explanation of the Aramaic is given in the Greek NT and I can see no (major?) variants in the apparatus of my Greek NT UBS 4th ed (1993). That is to say, that it is not just to be found in the TR as is implied.

Agreed, I've edited that out.--76.169.126.143 (talk) 12:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Article name

I have reverted a move to Raising of Tabitha, since we should generally have articles about the people rather than the events, especially if the people are named. Tabitha might actually be more common, but it would need disambiguation, I guess - maybe Tabitha (Bible). So I can see why "Dorcas" is the best article name. StAnselm (talk) 10:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

"Dorcas" is more common when referring to her as a charitable figure (e.g. "Dorcas societies" and "Dorcas windows"), while "Tabitha" may be more common with reference to the raising. When I search Google books, I find "Dorcas" to be a little more common overall. I would strongly endorse "Dorcas" as the best article name. -- 101.119.15.59 (talk) 07:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Not sure how you're searching but it is not "more common" at all on Google Books... and that is aside from the fact that Google Books is inherently not representative to determine anything since it totally excludes publications that are not in the form of a book. All the evidence indicates that Tabitha is more common (both Google search, Google Books and all other search engines. And more significantly the Bible mentions Tabitha as a name and then adds Dorca to elaborate (so one is seemingly the actual name while the other seemingly a translation/explanation). —Loginnigol (talk) 21:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Except that isn't how disambiguating brackets normally operate on Wikipedia. It's probably best to use WP:RM. StAnselm (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

There is no discussion here, really. It's about a character from Acts, not mentioned by contemporary extra-biblical sources. So Acts is the only source to go by, and it clearly states "whose name was Tabitha, which in Greek is Dorcas". Clear case. Her name was Tabitha ('gazelle'), and when a Greek translation was needed, as was common at the time, this was Dorcas. It's like Johann Sebastian Bach ('BAHH"), who in French becomes Jean-Sébastien Bach ('BASH"), although he never lived in France and probably never ever introduced himself by that name. In Tabitha's time, Greek was maybe more often spoken in Judaea/Palaestina than French was in cultured circles in Bach's Germany, but I'm not sure about that. Anyway, today's charitable societies and their name have no bearing whatsoever on the name of this article, which is strictly focused on the biblical figure. Acts, which was written in Greek and obviously had a reason to promote its message in this lingua franca of the Mediterranean and Middle East, calls her once more Tabitha in the famous quote from St Peter, "Tabitha, get up (kum)", in obvious reference to Jesus' "ṭlīthā qūm/talitha kum" from Mark 5:41, and once more Dorcas ("clothing that Dorcas...").

Not from me, but from Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1996), published by Thomas Nelson, now part of Oxford University Press, comments on the verb used here, diermeneuo: "in Acts 9:36, it is rendered "is by interpretation,", lit., "being interpreted" (of Tabitha, as meaning Dorcas)". Not surprisingly, Britannica offers "Tabitha (Dorcas)". As a secondary argument: while it seems that in the Western world 'Dorcas' did indeed enjoy larger use, probably because its easier pronunciation and more familiar sound, the Orthodox East never used any other name but Tabitha, Saint Tabitha being a canonised saint in Eastern Orthodoxy.Arminden (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Even in Greek, her name is Αγία Ταβιθά, A(g)ia Tabitha, St Tabitha. So not St Dorkas, although Dorkas is the Greek name. But Greeks understand Greek, i.e. read the Acts in original. Arminden (talk) 03:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I have set a wider discussion in motion at Talk:Tabitha_(name)#Name_change. Please consider contributing there. Arminden (talk) 13:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

SnowFire has made a valid point about the decisive argument being the popularity of the chosen variant (WP:COMMONNAME), rather than how "correct" it is. It seems that in English, Dorcas has been often used in church (not an argument, but interesting: two of the three stained windows from WikiCommons have inscriptions, both with "Dorcas"), while the King James translation clearly states that her name was Tabitha, Dorcas being an "interpretation" of that name ("a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas"). I have come across many entries, including one in Enc. Britannica for St Peter, who followed the scriptural pattern writing "Tabitha (Dorcas)". In the context of art, it's pretty much always "raising (of) Tabitha", see both in the UK (here) and the US (here), and in other non-English-speaking contexts it's always Tabitha. It seems to me that in any more rigurous context, 'Tabitha' was given preference, while in more popular contexts, 'Dorcas' or mixed forms such as 'Tabitha (Dorcas)', 'Tabitha/Dorcas' and 'Dorcas/Tabitha' are very common. If the use of English as a worldwide lingua franca is taken into consideration, Tabitha is by far the more frequently used version. If only the English-speaking Western countries are considered, I'm not so sure about that, native-speakers should take over from here. Anyway, we need a redirect for the name not chosen as the article title, and keeping "Tabitha" free for the purpose (it is now taken by an article about the wider use for the name) remains very much a valid prerequisite for that. To my mind, if the two names are relatively equally often used, the decisive argument should be which one is more accurate according to the sources. And I do mean secondary, reliable sources commenting on 9:36–42. Arminden (talk) 16:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Edits for style

I've done some editing for style. The earlier version was a little ungainly to read and had various incongruous remarks and digressions that made the narrative hard to follow.--76.169.126.143 (talk) 13:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 1 September 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus

3 editors (including the proposer) support the move, one "somewhat weakly". 3 editors oppose the move, one strongly.

It is first necessary to determine whether "Dorcas" or "Tabitha" is the subject's WP:COMMON NAME. Only if the common name is Tabitha is it necessary to consider whether the subject is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for that name. I find no consensus as to which is the common name. One opposing editor states that the common name is "most certainly" Dorcas, but provides only very limited evidence to support this. Despite a number of attempts to direct the proposer to the relevant policy, neither he nor any supporting editor presents clear evidence that Tabitha is the common name.

The proposer has inserted a very lengthy comment in the middle of the RM. I recognise that he has put a lot of work into this in good faith, but editors cannot reasonably be expected to sift through all this to identify the policy arguments. If Tabitha is the common name, it should be possible to demonstrate that concisely. (non-admin closure) Havelock Jones (talk) 11:39, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

---

• Dorcas → Tabitha
• Tabitha → Tabitha (name)

– Tabitha is the primary name, Dorcas is a secondary, translated version of her name (please read section on "Name"; Tabitha is introduced in Acts as a Jewish disciple of Jesus, the Jewish name was in Aramaic, Tabitha ('gazelle'), and for use among the many Greek-speakers of the time in her home city, a port, she translated it into the lingua franca of the Eastern Med, i.e. Greek: Dorkas. All disciples of Jesus were Jewish at the time, her own story leading a few verses down the line to the baptism of the centurion Cornelius, considered to be the first Gentile accepted into the fold - so no Gentile followers of Jesus before Cornelius, perhaps with the exception of the isolated Ethiopian eunuch. Church tradition based on Acts, and there are no other sources.) Once the renaming "Dorcas" to "Tabitha" is done (and actually before that), we need further moves: the current "Tabitha" article deals with the given name & surname and their wider use in English, and should best be called "Tabitha (name)". That name is blocked by a redirect, which needs to be removed. So we have two articles to be renamed, and a redirect to be removed, each action being currently blocked by the next.

To recap what I am asking for:
- The article about the original Tabitha from the Bible to be called "Tabitha" (not "Dorcas", that being a translated, and therefore derived, secondary name).
- The article about the English name Tabitha to be called "Tabitha (name)" (not simply "Tabitha", since there is one famous Tabitha, the biblical figure, who is more deserving).
To make that possible,
- The redirect "Tabitha (name)" leading to the article about the English name, should be removed, as it blocks two logical renamings. Then I'll take it from there. Arminden (talk) 14:48, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

• Procedural comment. I've boldly adjusted this to a multi-page move rather than separate page moves so that the discussion is in one spot. SnowFire (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• Comment. Mentioned this to the nom already, but Wikipedia has no policy that prefers Aramaic names to Greek ones or vice versa. We use the WP:COMMONNAME in English, which is inconsistent and varies by case (we know Saint Peter not Simon, Paul the Apostle not Saul, etc.). Unfortunately, there are a zillion unrelated hits on each of these names, so Ngrams / Google Books is not super helpful here. Nominator claimed that "stats are also in favour of Tabitha" elsewhere - care to go into more detail? What matters are the most common and predominant name used in texts on the person - do they use Tabitha, Dorcas, or both? Simply saying Dorcas is a "derived name" is not sufficient here, plenty of derived names are also common names. SnowFire (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose: The rationale does not seem written in a way that is relevant to Wikipedia guidelines. It does not address the question of whether the Dorcas topic is a proper WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Tabitha", and I believe it's not. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Not the nominator, but note that in fairness, even if it isn't the primary topic for "Tabitha", this page could theoretically be moved to Tabitha (disciple) if it turns out that the person really is known as "Tabitha" in English more frequently than Dorcas. Not clear if that's actually true yet though. SnowFire (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose: the relevant guideline is WP:COMMONNAME, and here the common name is most certainly "Dorcas". (See Dorcas society, etc.) StAnselm (talk) 18:27, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• Comment Another option could be to make Tabitha a primary redirect to Dorcas, and move the current Tabitha page to Tabitha (name). 162 etc. (talk) 19:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

"Wikipedia has no policy that prefers Aramaic names to Greek ones or vice versa." That truly made me laugh. Nobody ever said that! Not even closely. StAnselm, the Dorcas society is one single example. Riding on it has no relevnce whatsoever, there are good examples for both names. Where you placed an "etc.", examples and stats would have been welcome. I did make the point, actually provided the relevant arguments for both sides! (see the discussion one above this), what I need to provide now are stats and references. And I will. But everybody knows to use Google, and was I hoping for *relevant* contributions, not just smart remarks and private opinions, really. SnowFire has pointed to what matters, now either work in that direction, or... don't, with all due respect. Arminden (talk) 00:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I mean the discussion "Article name", two up, not one, sorry. 162 etc.: that's what I have proposed too, see there. Please, do read the discussion there. If you prefere, I can copy & paste my last contribution(s) from that thread in here. Is it needed? Arminden (talk) 00:26, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

• • Arminden: I am trying to help you out here, but when you nominate an article to be moved, Wikipedia editors do expect the nominator to do some of the legwork here. Saying "I'm right, now go out and prove it for me" is not going to earn you many friends - you need to do the "work in that direction". Note that I did warn you before that basing your argument on what "deserves" the spot was probably not going to go great. Incidentally I think that you might actually be right, but the way you show it is via something like "I looked this topic up in 5 reliable sources A, B, C, D, and E; and 4 of them filed it under Tabitha and used Tabitha in running text, such as in the XYZ Encyclopedia of Christianity". As for your comment I was responding to with "Greek or Aramaic", I mean your comment in your nomination about how "secondary, translated version" is treated as if it's unusual or bad. Yet "secondary, translated" names are perfectly normal in English and not a problem. So yes, you did say something "close" to that, since it sounds like from the basis of your argument we should move most figures in Roman Judea to their Aramaic name without exception. (I recognize that you clarified that elsewhere, but... you still said the same thing here in your requested move, so I had to give the same reply.) SnowFire (talk) 01:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Stats coming tomorrow. Arminden (talk) 23:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

_______________________________________________________
To clarify: I had intended to start a discussion, did it the way I knew, on talk-pages, but SnowFire told me that's not how it's done, that I should use another template. I did. I had no intention to become the Top Terminator, i.e. "Nominator", owing explanations beyond what I had already written. But once finding myself in the position of Great Feathered Serpent, I'll try to fill in the shoes for this one time–and avoid using this template ever again in the future, unless it's for a reason much more important to my heart than this.

Your Most Eminent Wikipedian Highness, Excellencies and Distinguished Members of the Panel: here are the arguments.

There is a certain schizophreny in Wiki procedure. On the one hand, names are subject to the criterion of recognisability; on the other, sources must be as academic as possible. Well, academia seldom produces popular, easily recognizable terms. This problem will play out here, as well.

Tabitha: is it a) more recognizable than Dorcas, and b) better accepted by academia? It is not a very clearcut YES, but I will plead in favour of this motion.

This is a matter of interest only and strictly in the context of Christianity and the Church. So what name do the main denominations in the Eglish-speaking world prefer? Noting that enWiki serves the world at large, English being the lingua franca of our time, and therefore enWiki being used and edited by far more people than just English native speakers.

1. The official name is "Saint Tabitha" for 2/3 of Christianity (Catholics and Orthodox).

It is undecided, either Dorcas or Tabitha, over large parts of English-speaking Protestant denominations, with a possible recent shift from Dorcas (traditionally dominant?) towards Tabitha.

This can all be checked in official Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant calendars. The first two are very clear. For the Protestants, see the more online-active Episcopalian Church (US Anglicans), who are keeping both the "Lydia, Dorcas, and Phoebe, Witnesses to the Faith" feast name, but in their General Convention 2018 opted for a feast name of "TABITHA (DORCAS) OF JOPPA: Tabitha, also known by her Greek name Dorcas", so giving primacy to the scriptural main name, Tabitha.

1. Bible dictionaries (classics online, Google & Amazon favourites)
   

1 prefers Tabitha, 3 use Tabitha with Dorcas only in brackets/"interpreted as", 8 prefer Dorcas, rest are undecided. So 4 prefer Tabitha, 8 Dorcas:
1:2, Dorcas wins here.

1. Catholic Encyclopedia: the mother of all Christian encyclopedias. Counting the names used a) in articles, and b) in homilies; direct Bible quotes or various translations were left out.
   

No entry for Dorcas, or for Tabitha.
Tabitha (entries alone or as primary name): 8 authors (9 on 8 pages)
Dorcas (entries alone or as primary name): 4 authors (5 on 4 pages)
2:1 for Tabitha this time.

I know Wiki is allergic to primary sources, but when we're speaking about a biblical figure with no other mention outside one passage in one book of the NT, it's worth repeating that the original Greek text of Acts 9:36, where the good lady is introduced to the reader, states:

"… a disciple named Tabitha (in Greek her name is Dorcas) "

NIV text, whose purpose is that "the Bible be expressed in broadly understood modern English."

"… disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas"

King James Version, with a more literal translation of the Greek.

So clearly: a Jewess with an Aramaic name, who followed a widespread habit of the time (see for instance here, Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity), for getting around easier in a Hellenistic world, had translated her name into Greek for use among non-Aramaic-speakers. Today's general tendency is to "go back to the roots", especially among Protestants, so much so that some dropped Jesus for Jeshua. I guess that explains the apparent shift of names in the Episcopalian calendar. So yes, the primary source does very much matter.

So what did historically push the use in English of the secondary, Greek name, at least for a while? I can only guess, but Latin, followed by Greek, were traditionally the main entryways into the biblical text and the exegetic literature, and there Dorcas seems to have fared better than Tabitha. Jerome, the translator of the Latin Vulgate, in a letter to Eustochium written in Latin in c. 404, uses 'Dorcas'. Maybe Tabitha sounded more exotic and felt harder to pronounce in the West. Interesting fact though (hi StAnselm!): while in Britain and the US we have (Protestant?) 'Dorcas societies', in Germany there are (Protestant) 'Tabitha-Nähwerkstätten', lit. ' Tabitha sewing workshops '. Maybe Germany, the homeland of Luther, took the sola scriptura principle more seriously and used the primary name from Acts. _______________________________________________________

Search results

-A-
Official name in Church by denomination
RESULT: Catholics and Orthodox (1st- and 2nd- largest denominations in the world, over 65% of all Christians - 1.583B of max. 2.42B) use "Saint Tabitha"; Protestants use both Tabitha and Dorcas, possible recent shift from Dorcas towards Tabitha

Saint Tabitha
– Catholic Church: "Saint Tabitha", 25 Oct [1]
– Eastern Orthodox Church: "Saint Tabitha the Widow, raised from the dead by the Apostle Peter"

Undecided, either Dorcas or Tabitha
– Protestants (Episcopal Church / US, others): "Lydia, Dorcas, and Phoebe, Witnesses to the Faith"; but also "TABITHA (DORCAS) OF JOPPA: Tabitha, also known by her Greek name Dorcas", see Episcopal Church, "Lesser Feasts and Fasts 2018 Conforming to General Convention 2018"
At Calendar of saints (Episcopal Church): 25 [Jan] Tabitha (Dorcas) of Joppa
_______________________________________________________

-B-
Google search for:
Bible dictionary
First 3 results, numbered.

---

1) http://kingjamesbibledictionary.com/
RESULT: 1 out of 4 (Smith's) prefers Tabitha, the rest are undecided.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Easton's Bible Dictionary

• Tabitha
  

(in Greek called Dorcas)… [full entry]

• Dorcas
  

A female antelope, or gazelle, a pious Christian widow at Joppa … called Tabitha by the Jews and Dorcas by the Greeks.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Hitchcock's Names Dictionary

• Tabitha
  

clear-sighted; a roe-deer

• Dorcas
  

a female roe-deer
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Naves Topical Index

• Tabitha
  

A Christian woman in Joppa

• Dorcas
  

Called also Tabitha, a pious woman of Joppa.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Smith's Bible Dictionary
Tabitha
(gazelle), also called Dorcas by St. Luke

http://kingjamesbibledictionary.com
Dorcas
(gazelle). [TABITHA]

---

2) https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionaries/
again HITCHCOCK'S, nothing else so nothing new (Tabitha. clear-sighted; a roe-deer // Dorcas. a female roe-deer)

---

3) www.churchofjesuschrist.org
RESULT: Dorcas is used:
Dorcas
A woman of Joppa, well known for her good works, restored to life by Peter (Acts 9:36–42). Dorcas is the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic name Tabitha, both meaning “a gazelle.”

_______________________________________________________
-C-
Amazon search
Amazon: Best Sellers in Christian Bible Dictionaries & Encyclopedias
The first dozen, excluding those only focusing on one language (Greek of Hebrew) => seven left
1) The New Strong's Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (2010)
2) Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament (1996)
3) Zondervan's Compact Bible Dictionary (2001)
4) Holman Illustrated Bible (2015)
5) Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary: New and Enhanced Edition (2014)
6) The New Combined Bible Dictionary and Concordance (1973)
7) Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Premier Reference Series) (2011)

Google Books =>
RESULT: Dorcas: 7 (# 2/106, 4/439, 5/16, 5/327, 5/976, 7/2, 7/5), Tabitha with Dorcas only in brackets/interpreted as: 3 (# 2/330, 4/235/630, 7/3), the rest undecided

---

1) The New Strong's Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (2010)
no access

---

2) Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament (1996), UK + US
106: Dorcas.
330: "being interpreted" (of Tabitha, as meaning Dorcas)

---

3) Zondervan's Compact Bible Dictionary (2001), US
does not appear on Google Books

---

4) Holman Illustrated Bible (2015) US
https://books.google.com/books?id=krhBrgEACAAJ&q=Dorcas
23: Tabitha (Dorcas)
439 under D, Dorcas. Etymology and Acts story.
1527 under T, Tabitha. Etymology, "serves as the counterpart of the Greek name Dorcas. See Dorcas."

---

5) Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary: New and Enhanced Edition (2014), UK
16: Peter raises Dorcas
37: a woman named Tabitha, or Dorcas
53: the dorcas gazelle || …was called Tabitha (Hebrew [sic!] for gazelle), or Dorcas (Greek for gazelle)
323: DORCAS (gazelle)
327: under D, Dorcas. Dorcas... a Christian (sic) woman... Tabitha was her Aramaic name
630: Tabitha (or Dorcas)
976: … by Peter on Dorcas

---

6) The New Combined Bible Dictionary and Concordance (1973), US
no access

---

7) Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Premier Reference Series) (2011)
no access
"Based on Articles from the Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible" => looked that one up.

Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible: 5 vols. (rev. ed., 2010)
vol. 2, the main article is on "Dorcas"
vol. 2, article on "Men's garments": DORCAS fully capitalised to send to article: "DORCAS had made numbers of these articles"
vol. 3, article on "Joppa": Tabitha (DORCAS) => named as Tabitha by entry author; Dorcas betw. brackets & fully capitalised to send to article
vol. 5, article stump on "Tabitha": DORCAS fully capitalised to send to main article: "See discussion under DORCAS"
vol. 5, article on "Resurection in the NT": "raisings of Dorcas and Eutychus"
same: DORCAS fully capitalised to send to main article: "raising of DORCAS"
TOTAL: the main article is on "Dorcas", all cross-references to it are in full capitalisation. One entry author names her Tabitha, one names her Dorcas.
_______________________________________________________

-D-
Catholic Encyclopedia
Shows up in comments in articles, and in homilies.
under D: no entry for Dorcas
under T: no entry for Tabitha
Tabitha: entries alone or as primary name (w/o Acts quotes)
RESULT: 9 on 8 pages
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02203b.htm raising Tabitha from the dead
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08268a.htm Tabitha, a name interpreted [as] Dorcas
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210121.htm text of Acts (Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas || garments which Dorcas had made || which Dorcas made || Tabitha, arise), and comment: It is not simply said, that Tabitha died
https://www.newadvent.org/bible/act009.htm [text of Acts in Lat and Eng]
same: https://www.newadvent.org/bible/act009.htm#verse39
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01117a.htm Tabitha (Greek, Dorcas)
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm Tabitha (Dorcas); the raising of Tabitha
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/230401.htm Consider, I pray, Cornelius, Tabitha.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240211.htm When Tabitha died
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09769a.htm frescoes in the Carmine… the "Resurrection of Tabitha"

Dorcas: entries alone or as primary name (w/o Acts quotes, zoology)
RESULT: 5 on 4 pages
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01517a.htm "Animals in the Bible": the çebhî (Deuteronomy 12:15, etc.; D.V. roe) or gazelle, antilope dorcas (so unrelated, just the scientific Latin name of a gazelle)
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3001108.htm letter by Jerome to Eustochium (in Latin): raising again of Dorcas || As in the case of Dorcas
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240185.htm showing what things Dorcas had made (almost literal quote from Acts)
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/34062.htm Homily by St. Ambrose (in Latin): He raised Dorcas

Enough. I'm not a lawyer. Have a great day, Arminden (talk) 02:42, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Please tell me when you're done looking through it, to allow me to remove at least the detailed list of sources. If I look at it once more, I'll hand myself to the next mental institution a.s.a.p.

Please remember: independently of the rest, moving "Tabitha" to "Tabitha (name)" (this implies removing the redirect) and keeping "Tabitha" for the article about the biblical figure was proposed by others, too. If the panel decides in favour of keeping "Dorcas", a) I will/won't hang myself, remains to be seen, and b) "Tabitha" should be made into a redirect to "Dorcas". I hope at least that part is uncontroversial. Arminden (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Nothing? Not one comment? Arminden (talk) 20:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, you haven't presented much of an argument for the move. It seems Dorcas is still used at least as much as Tabitha. I stand by my !vote. StAnselm (talk) 20:56, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Not? To summarise again:

The official name is "Saint Tabitha" for 2/3 of Christianity (Catholics and Orthodox).

English-speaking Protestant are undecided, either Dorcas or Tabitha, with a possible recent shift from Dorcas (traditionally dominant?) towards Tabitha.

To me it sounds quite convincing. Arminden (talk) 21:02, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, but we prefer scholarly sources, like encyclopedias. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia has "Dorcas".

That's your very personal choice. I have listed lots of others, including Cath. Enc. - very hard to dismiss. Arminden (talk) 23:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

• Support, per Arminden's sources, although somewhat weakly. There's a strong stability argument that since both are used, just leave things as they are, but it does seem like Tabitha is used subtly more, so no harm in moving. Note that both should still be prominently mentioned in the lead section, and I don't agree with Arminden adding in the etymology to the lead (it's not actually important, Saint Peter doesn't discuss the "rock" analogy, so don't see why "gazelle" is a big deal either), but that's a matter for normal editing. SnowFire (talk) 07:21, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Re. the Peter analogy: "the rock upon..." is a metaphor which led to a nickname, while here we have a very dufferent phenomenon, one widely reported from the Hellenistic world, of translating local names to Greek or finding related Greek names for non-Greek people as part of a large process of adapration and partial acculturalisation. But those second names were only used "outside the house", read: one's own community. Petrus was very much used by Jesus' Jewish followors themselves. But it's indeed minor. As to StAnselm's The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: it was published before WWI by a fundamentalist, and revised by evangelicals, i.e. biblical textualists, in the 70s-80s. I think I was wrong to analyse the entries among the first Bible encyclopedias thrown up by Amazon, as they are to be expected to have this tendency. Evangelism is huge in the US and fast growing in the world. That shouldn't be a problem, except that they do tend to be on the populist side, i.e. go along with older habits and terminology, as not to "rock the boat". Modern Protestant scholars take a different stand. Sticking to academic or at least neutral works of reference like those published by Oxford UP immediately changes the balance towards Tabitha. Arminden (talk) 11:19, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

PS: Anong the old European Powers it was common until recently to regularly translate at least the given names and pronounce first and last names as if they were those of countrymen, see French (I have already given the "Jean-Sébastien Bach" example, see also Michel-Angelo with French pronounciation). It's the same phenomenon. Arminden (talk) 11:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I fully acknowledge that academic criteria are not the only ones on Wiki, that was my first sentence in the request (conflicting Wiki rules, recognisability vs RS criteria). I find SnowFire's analysis very much to the point and I'm stressing again that the 2 names should of course always be mentioned together, as they are in Acts. That I've never put into question. Arminden (talk) 11:35, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

• Strong oppose the name is Dorcas. In a Greek book. Why are we even having this RM? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:28, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

• The above doesn't contribute anything to the discussion @In ictu oculi: hi. Sorry, but did you read anything on this page? Or is "Why are we even having this RM?" your only argument? Because "in a Greek book" can only be a joke. Was it Asterix at the Olympic Games in Greek? Joke aside: did you look up any other Greek book, say, the Septuagint? Or any Greek Orthodox source? I guess not. Start the easy way: look up this article, "Dorcas" for now, at Greek Wiki. You end up here: Αγία Ταβιθά. Αγία Ταβιθά is Saint Tabitha. No Dorkas (with a k in Greek) anywhere in sight in the title, not even in brackets. Dorkas only comes up after the Aramaic, טביתא.

Or, as easy: go to orthodoxwiki.org. Search for "Dorcas". Nothing. Surprised? Then "Tabitha". 3 hits! Vestments and Church Supplies with a Tabitha of Joppa Vestments, Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem with "the tomb of St. Tabitha" (in a monastery in Jaffa), and Baptismal names for Orthodox Christians, with - no, no Dorcas/Dorkas, just "Tabitha (f) - St. Tabitha (October 25 - Saint)".

Me, as a good Romanian, went to look up www.crestinortodox.ro too. 3 articles mentioning "Tabita" ('Tabita din Iope' in full), and none for Dorcas.

You said Greek, not Greek Orthodox in other languages, sorry. So let's Google around for Orthodox sites in Greek: "Ταβιθά" "Ιόππη", and "Ταβιθα" "Ιόππη" (the accent on the α seems to be optional). Ταβιθά or Ταβιθα is the name of the saint everywhere on websites with understandable names like orthodoxoiorizontes.gr ("Agia Tabitha"), orthodoxia.info ("I Tabitha..."), orthodoxianewsagency.gr ("i Agia Tavitha"), or even iellada.gr ("Agia Tavitha"). Try "Δορκάς" "Ιόππη". You get lots of Tabitha, with Dorkas as an explanation following behind it. Why add Joppa? Because I don't want to get hits on gazelles.

I guess in Greek there is indeed no need even starting the slightest discussion. But this is English Wiki, and you haven't said a word about the use in English. Arminden (talk) 02:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Repeat very strong oppose based on GBook results Seriously this amount of text? I don't know who you think you're talking to but I stand by what I said, Dorcas as you'd expect in mainstream English print sources is the name because it's a Greek book and a Greek name, and when reported in English the main text name is used (GBooks About 2,580 results for "Dorcas was" + Apostle vs About 2,120 results "tabitha was" + Apostle) . What I see from the above is WP:BLUDGEON behaviour which is not appropriate to the RM mechanism. You've had your say, now please stop. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Support. e.g. Tabitha, also known as Dorcas. Arminden's legwork is thorough (aside from the fact who'd call their kid a dork-as, doubly offensive, as opposed to a gazelle:)Nishidani (talk) 09:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Holy Saints Peter & Tabitha, have mercy!

I feel a bit steamrolled here.

• I did it my way, by pinging those who'd cared enough as to actually edit the article in the past. Then I was told that's not the way, and I complied, w/o knowing what I'm going into.
• I've made the case quite concisely (hi Havelock Jones) and invited ppl to bring their counter-arguments, but was told that "editors do expect the nominator to do some of the legwork here". I never thought I'd ever be a terminator or anything like that, but I'm a disciplined soldier, so I did a thorough research, as one should. Gave BOTH sides their ammo - can't be more honest than that.
• I asked to be told when to remove the voluminous "proof", as to leave only the concise results. Silence. So catch 22: no good without, then accused of drowning ppl in text. Unfair. I should have taken my teddy bear and go.
• I did my best to be a good lawyer for the case, presented a fair and properly prepped file. The only reactions were of the type "I do/don't agree", "why even consider", basically "Mom and my priest say X, and that's that for me". Is this the procedure Wiki is supporting? Never again!

Next time I'll ask Putin. He knows how to get things done. Or pray to St Tabitha. The odds of logic to triumph would be by far better. Arminden (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Only half answered

@Havelock Jones, SnowFire, BarrelProof, StAnselm, 162 etc., In ictu oculi, and Nishidani: hi. I had made two (three?) requests, which SnowFire has then boldly combined into one. Now one of them has been rejected. This issue has not been addressed yet:

• The article about the English name Tabitha to be called "Tabitha (name)" (not simply "Tabitha", since there is one famous biblical Tabitha).
• To make that possible, the redirect "Tabitha (name)" leading to the article about the English name, should be removed, as it blocks the above.
  

In short:

• Tabitha → Tabitha (name)

162 etc. has suggested the very same change by themselves as logical, even w/o noticing that it was already part of my general concept. Nobody (!) has rejected it. So, can we please have that done? Thanks.

PS: Dear Chief Blinking Eye, how! I wondered if to answer, but I can't resist. I'm sure it's not news to you that a) arbitrary Google searches don't matter here, and b) the way you chose your search words changes the outcome. I tried to be fair, you weren't. Why look up "Tabitha/Dorcas was" + Apostle? Try "Tabitha/Dorcas" +Joppa and you get the opposite result. And then again, "Tabitha" "Joppa" (with " ") turns it around yet again. Both in your search and in these two by only relatively small margins. So you see. Arminden (talk) 11:35, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: As the WP:UNINVOLVED closing editor, I express (and hold) no view on the merits of the underlying suggestions. To be clear, my finding of no consensus above included both suggestions, see e.g. BarrelProof's comment. A finding of no consensus means that you may submit a fresh RM, either for moving this page to Tabitha (with a consequential move of Tabitha) or for a free-standing move of Tabitha. If you wish to propose a free-standing move of Tabitha, you should submit an RM at that page. In order to establish a consensus that Tabitha should redirect here, you will need to demonstrate that this article subject is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for that name, i.e. that a user searching for "Tabitha" is highly likely to be searching for this article's subject.

If you submit a fresh RM, it should refer to the relevant policy, i.e. WP:COMMONNAME and/or WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and include a short explanation of why you believe that policy applies, with links to the relevant RSs and/or stats. You need not link to every RS which supports your position: choose the 3-4 which you consider the highest quality. You don't need to comment on the RSs: they say whatever they say and editors will form their own view.

As a personal note, I have the impression that you find Wikipedia's policies somewhat frustrating. If that is the case, you may prefer to put your energies into making uncontroversial edits, but it is entirely up to you.Havelock Jones (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: PS, I believe if Tabitha does move, the correct new title would be Tabitha (given name) per WP:APOTITLE. Havelock Jones (talk) 13:35, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

I see no reason to move Tabitha to Tabitha (given name). Why do that if Dorcas is not going to be moved to Tabitha? Dorcas is simply one of the many people who have been called Tabitha. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 14:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

"Dorcas is simply one of the many people who have been called Tabitha." Not... That's exactly how Tabitha has made it into the world and throughout the centuries: due to the Bible, and only so. You think anyone would be called Peter or John today, or David and Michael, were it not for the Bible? Think again. THAT is my point, and I'm an atheist: the entire Western culture is permeated by biblical lore, and so is the Muslim world indirectly, too. (How many Yusufs, Dawoods, Issas and Mariams would you have w/o that one book? Excuse me for not buying the Jibril story.) So yes, well-known biblical names do have precedence, as they are more often than not the origin of today's names. Not every Netanyahu or Alzheimyahu from verse soandso, I'm not talking of those.

One thing I'm VERY sure: I'm not going back to any of those WP procedures. There are enough common-sense ways, which don't require deep procedural studies, in the end reaching few of the truly interested editors. The conclusion is fully mine, no need for a consensus. And if there's no other way, it will stay as it is.

"Tabitha (name)" is less narrow. Allows for institutional names, nicknames, anything. So let's keep the proposal as it is. Thanks. Arminden (talk) 14:34, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Moving from Dorcas to Tabitha

I am sorry for arriving to the discussion when it has apparently been closed, but as I understand Wikipedia is not still, and already-discussed topics can always be re-discussed, I would like to point out that I fully agree that Tabitha is the most common name in English and therefore this article should be moved to Tabitha. As has also been pointed out, her actual name, the one she called herself, was Tabitha, with Dorcas being only the Greek version of it. All other languages, from Russians and the Slavic languages to the German languages and to the Romance languages such as Portuguese / Spanish / French, all call her Tabitha or a similar variation thereof, so I fully support moving this article to Tabitha. Dan Palraz (talk) 14:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I concur.Nishidani (talk) 16:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

As do I. Srnec (talk) 23:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Six months later, doing it now then. Dan Palraz (talk) 18:57, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

I have reverted the move. You need to use WP:RM when there has been a previous discussion. But I notice you chose "Saint Tabitha" rather than "Tabitha". StAnselm (talk) 21:26, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

It is because "Tabitha" is already taken by the article on the name itself. So, Nishidani and Srnec, which do you think would be better: "Saint Tabitha" (as Saint Peter, Saint George, etc.) or "Tabitha (Dorcas)"? Or something else? Thanks! Dan Palraz (talk) 14:38, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

At this point, perhaps Tabitha (saint). But I suggest you also ask Arminden. I'll go along with whatever solution he suggests.Nishidani (talk) 16:14, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Once again, you need to use WP:RM. StAnselm (talk) 16:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)